Updating post from Reddit.
Rachel Reeves is under pressure from Labour MPs to increase taxes on landlords. Experts suggest three potential measures: charging National Insurance on rental income, creating a separate tax band for landlords, or imposing VAT on residential lettings. Critics warn these changes could discourage investment and worsen the housing crisis.
>Labour MPs are said to be keen on increasing the amount landlords pay on rental income. Tax experts told The Telegraph that Ms Reeves could force landlords to pay National Insurance on their rental income, introduce a separate tax band for rental income or levy VAT on residential property lettings.
> But Chris Norris, of the National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA), pointed out that landlords already paid income tax on rental income. He warned further taxes would “increase complexity, dissuade investment and risk deepening the housing crisis”. He added: “Rumours concerning the imposition of a ‘rental income tax’ are misleading as they suggest that such income is not already taxed just like all other personal and business income.”
> Mr Norris, chief policy officer at the NRLA, said: “Since 2015, landlords have faced a series of punitive tax and regulatory changes, such as the removal of mortgage interest relief and the introduction and subsequent hiking of the stamp duty levy on additional properties. “These changes have significantly impacted investment in the private rental sector, with many landlords leaving the sector and reducing their portfolios due to financial pressure and a lack of confidence in future returns. “With demand for rented homes at record highs and supply failing to keep up, policies that disincentivise investment will inevitably hurt tenants the most, leading to higher rents and reduced choice.”
Outcome: Rent goes up.
they want that
What they (socialists) actually want is to force private landlords out of the rental market.
If landlords are selling and no one who who is currently renting can afford to buy, who buys the houses? Big investment companies, who become the new private landlords. These companies like Blackrock will never sell these assets once they’ve acquired them.
Why do “they” want this? Because if you do not own your home, and all the housing stock is owned by companies who won’t sell them it means you have no choice other than to pay rent for your whole life.
Why is this bad? Because if you have to pay rent, how are you going to be able to afford to retire?
And that’s what they want! They don’t want us to be able to retire. Because if we retire we become burdens on the economy rather than contributors to the economy. We have ageing populations in the West now, meaning that the proportion of pensioners to working age people is increasing so there are fewer people paying NI to fund retired people’s pensions. And unfortunately, their solution is to prevent us from being able to retire.
>Big investment companies, who become the new private landlords. These companies like Blackrock will never sell these assets once they’ve acquired them.
What you're describing here is quite literally the opposite of socialism
I couldnt tell if this was satire or not tbh
It isn’t the opposite, socialism has a ruling class and a working class. Those few private land lords will be part of the ruling class.
Capitalism would allow regular working class people to become private landlords, build wealth and move into the middle class. Socialism has no middle class, which is what will happen when we’re all paying rent for or whole lives with no chance of getting out of the cycle. You have to do more of a deep analysis kiddo. If you want lessons send me a message.
>Capitalism would allow regular working class people to become private landlords, build wealth and move into the middle class.
Sure, in theory capitalism lets anyone become a landlord and climb the ladder. In practice, late-stage capitalism means most are stuck renting from someone who bought decades ago.
Over time capital accumulation means wealth slowly pools in increasingly smaller groups of people and that's where we are today. I think I read just this morning that the 350 richest UK families own £700bn of the country's wealth. That can only exist by eating the middle class and that's where we are today
Marx wrote about this over a century again and called this the shift from labour-based value to rentier capitalism.... might be worth a skim, even if it's just so you can learn some basic definitions.
Socialism has a ruling class?
>Socialism has no middle class
The majority is middle class in soft-socialist Scandinavia.
Not talking about soft socialism am I
I wouldn't know. I guess not?
I believe they're suggesting socialists will be beaten by capitalists because the large investment firms will buy up housing stock when socialists make it untenable for landlords with smaller portfolios to keep hold of their's.
I can tell you have a kind soul because you're trying to find logic in a nonsensical comment
Socialism is when capitalism...
>Big investment companies
The same investment companies (like BlackRock) who will buy the farmland when the family farms are pushed out of business.
The UK's private assets are going to be forcibly sold to global megacorps.
By a Labour government.
Let that sink in.
To be honest a lot of the general public are aware of this it’s just depressing because nothing will change
Do you really think that there is really someone who came up with a plan like that? Like sat down and said… “ok, if people retire, they become burden on the society, and we can’t allow that to happen, because we care about IT, so let’s increase rental costs by raising extra taxes on the landlords”
If yes, then my questions are - who are these people, why do they care about how much burden there is on society, and why are they so thick and cruel at the same time to think about it so one-dimensionally to come up with such a weird scheme to keep people from retirement by forcing the to rent by rescuing rental stock? Just sounds too delulu.
Half my building is owned by one of these companies, and another building across the road
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about
Listen socialism is bad ok! The capitalist owned media told me so!
Uhh… have you read the socialist party’s website? This isn’t what the left stand for. Labour aren’t left, or socialist. There’s no difference between Labour, Conservatives or Reform.
>What they (socialists) actually want is to force private landlords out of the rental market.
Who exactly are the socialists here? Because it's definitely not Starmer and Reeves.
Just shutup and get back to work already
Is that any way to talk to the people who pay your electric bill? No leccy and you wouldn’t even have a phone or laptop to pipe up on 😂 know your role
It’s already high, more people will default
More risk of non payment: rent goes up.
Yeah the issue seems to be the underlying house price, ergo whoever has a mortgage in the property has to charge high rents to make a return.
Decades of housing being used as a speculative investment/retirement fund continues to extract crippling amounts of money from working people.
Fiddling around the edges with taxes would appear to do absolutely nothing to solve the real problem.
Yep and my insurance has gone up.
You can put the rent up, but if it goes wrong they can not pay you rent for 12 months and nothing much a landlord can do, other than go thought the long drawn out section 8 process.
The people upstairs from me have not paid rent since last September - a big brand new 2 bed in London.
So it’s not always as easy as up the rent, the law is not with the landlord.
oops
The rental bill doesnt include max rent increase percentage?
The one that isnt law yet?
And it doesnt matter if the rent increases are capped. LL's will just max those increases every year until the property is making the required margins.
I haven't increased my rent for 3 years, a levy of VAT (20% i assume) or any additional taxes would be the final straw for me and i would hike the rent as much as i could to prevent making even more of a loss than i already do.
A maximum annual rent increase will just mean that landlords like myself (and most private landlords) that don't raise their tents often or at all will start increasing their tents by the maximum amount every year so as not to be caught out. This is what happens every time price caps are implemented.
No, just once per year and tenants can go to the tribunal if the increase is higher than the market rent.
But market rents will be going up as well. It's not like one landlord gets hit with this.
Increase taxes by £100? Landlords will increase rents by £100.
Which m'ron in Labour came up with this idea???
Rachel from accounts
I’ll have to put rent up by £125 to cover the tax on the increase and the NI
Only if the market allows it. If people don’t rent with your inflated price you’ll have an empty property costing you more.
With the government bringing in nearly a million people every year the market will allow it.
A real party of the working classes would be stopping immigration.
Give it time. There’s going to be an explosion of new homes - especially affordable - I’m in the sector and it’s lining up for it.
Unless the government restarts mass building social housing, like pre-Thatcher days, housing and rents aren't dropping any time soon.
We'd need to see a scale of house building like China to plummet rents.
Haha how is that going to happen when all the skill base is retiring, young people don’t want to be in construction because it’s hard work and CSCS is forcing the older guys out and no one will invest because there is no incentive to.
I’d love to see this boom. It’s all bullshit. They don’t have a clue. Rents will go up with every single stupid policy that’s implemented other than a policy that makes it easier and more profitable to rent out homes.
Unlikely, the last crash killed the small builders. Just a few corporates these days, no compensation and their not going to scew themselves building too many.
>With the government bringing in nearly a million people every year the market will allow it.
The majority of those coming to this country every year are foreign students and asylum seekers. Good luck getting them to pay inflated rent prices.
Foreign students have more money than any of us.
The prices aren't "inflated" they're the result of an over demand.
Unfortunately there will be people who'd rent with them. It's not like only one landlord will raise prices. If all rents in my area go up by 100s£ I might as well just take the loss, as having a roof over your head isn't really a choice. And then even if there's someone cheaper - you need to account for moving costs, deposits etc. It isn't as simple as, oh this place is 100£ cheaper let me go there.
Sorry mate, it’s a tongue in cheek comment, though in all seriousness the problem is there is more demand than supply so people will pay more …
I’ve managed to never evicted in more than 10 years of being a landlord with multiple properties and I’ve only put up rent for existing tenants 3 times.
Rents are sky rocketing through lack of supply at present… I’m being reminded nearly weekly by our estate agent that they have tenants waiting and I could evict my current tenants in one property and put the rent up £200.
Pushing more landlords out through increased taxes or financial penalties won’t bring rental prices down and it doesn’t seem to be making a significant difference to house prices, that’s driven more by interest rates…
"If people don't rent."
My friend, this is not so easy. You need a place to sleep.
Surely, as a business, you just absorb the cost, seeing as you’re “providing a service”?
Business should be mandatory in school. Business can "absorb" temporary blips in costs, they don't "absorb" higher running costs their passed on to the end customer. Always.
This is the “aspect” of neoliberalism that allows the rich to stay rich, they will never absorb the cost without regulatory requirement.
If the govt took a pie chart of the ratio split between workers and owners, then enforced a change to the ratio where the workers were all able to afford what we could 20 years ago, income inequality would seem a fever dream because the leeching class isn’t leeching.
Wrong sub mate.
>Wrong sub mate.
Just sociopaths allowed here?
A downside and consequence of the complexity of the UK tax system around how you are taxed on your income based on (1) its source - employment, dividends, capital gains, other investments etc., and (2) your age (people of pension age don't pay NI - would this exemption still apply?).
A simplified tax system where all income was taxed the same irrespective of its source would render discussions such as in the article irrelevant, but vested interested will argue against that.
This.
Abolish employee's NI and merge it into income tax.
Abolish dividend tax and merge it into income tax.
Lower income tax and/or increase state pension if we want to make this revenue neutral.
If you push landlords out of the market by making them pay more, you end up with less rentals. Because owner occupiers live less densely than renters meaning demand down less than supply goes down, so in effect demand goes up.
Demand goes up, rent goes up.
Landlord-ism isn’t “The Problem” it’s a side effect of the problem. It’s like getting a headache due to a brain tumor and thinking you can solve it with paracetamol. Yay I can’t feel the headache anymore.
as an economist I don't agree. landlords selling will flood the market with supply and push property prices down. That is already happening where I have property due to a mix of airbnb and pre-stampduty rises.
It doesn't help those that are not ready to buy or don't want to though, but if for those that do buy, they will no longer be renters, and also will slow down the rate of rental turnover, which could slow rises.
However the reality is that unless they control large corporate landlords then they will just buy everything up and push up prices themselves. It's not clear how they deal with overseas landlords either. Not tackling those will be far more damaging than allowing UK based smaller landlords from renting out property.
Care to share the evidence that the landlords forced out the past decade or so have pushed property prices down?
As I pointed out in my post, owner occupiers live less densely than renters. Which goes against your second line.
Large corporate landlords aren’t buying up properties from Rightmove, they are almost exclusively funding new builds.
Well I'm talking about Bath, I don't have statistics for all cities and it's likely to vary.
But Bath has had a tonne of airbnbs that are selling up and other rentals going on the market. It's classic rental apartment size. For my apartment there were over 100 similar properties flooding the market within 1/2 mile radius.
The agents and my own manual research saw the values go down, places staying on way longer. Apparently the only places getting bought are mostly by all-cash investors looking for cheap desperate pickings.
ETA. Just re-read. This is not over the past decade, but more recently. Definitely since covid but also the tax declarations with airbnb apparently affected it - a lot of airbnbs going up.
Airbnb is a bit of a different story, that’s great news. Airbnbs are a scourge on our property market and the quicker they are converted back from providing 0 housing to providing actual housing is great.
Yes I 100% agree, even though it hits me.
I'm based in Barcelona and airbnb (& co) are an invasive parasite destroying the city.
Owners live less densely than renters doesn’t imply that they live less densely simply because they are owners. I would suggest it’s far more likely that it’s just because owners are richer than renters and can afford more space.
Yes, exactly. When you make changes that push landlords out of the market, the homes then go to the “next richest”.
In effect you agree with me. All this is doing is making things harder for the poorer people that will still not be able to afford to buy but have even more competition to rent.
Landlords are certainly a problem, just not related to the undersupply of houses.
Enforce regulatory changes where the landlords, who can’t make a profit out of rentals that they’ve priced at “market rates” (any 2 bed in a shit hole for £850+ outside of a city centre or Bristol ) have to sell to the British state for a calculated ACTUAL VALUE price, and these are the new council homes.
Next? Close all tax grants and looopholes given to middle upper class people, as these should go before PiP goes…
Regulation in order to avoid certain parties escaping the rat race fallacy is needed, and LUCKILY FOR THE BRITISH PUBLIC, it is the haves, and not the have-nots who are to take the short straw.
The status quo is unacceptable and everyone has 50 people to blame but themselves and landlords are at the top of the list.
Sounds like you agree the problem lies with the government (who can’t afford to buy up properties btw).
Yeah completely. But we’d also need to agree that anyone who isn’t working class, and earned themselves upto 4-5 properties deserves to be the losing party.
The solution is a squeeze, like austerity squeezed and Tony Blair’s neo labour SQUEEZED. Just this time it’s the people with offshore accounts and privately educated kids who get squeezed.
No one deserves to be the losing party, that’s simply loser mentality.
My entire point is that by attempting to squeeze landlords, the government have caused rents to go up because they don’t understand the problem, or they do and simply prefer to point score for power.
Landlords have been squeezed ever since Osborne’s section 24. If you plot rent prices on a graph you’ll be able to see where government policy that was “renter friendly” was implemented time and time again. The solution is not to think, ah yes, this time, this time will be the time it somehow reverses it all.
Again, my point is that landlords aren’t the problem. The problem exists and that has caused landlords. They are the symptom of the problem, so you solve the problem and not the symptom and the symptom goes away.
Idk landlords add absolutely zero value to anything. It’s not like they rent out at cost, they are always going to add a few percent.
In an ideal world all rented homes would be from the council and just at cost.
What does at cost include? Salaries, maintenance, replacements, sinking funds, mortgage repayment, funds to increase stock.
Your zero value statement is daft as you don't expect tourists and short term let's to buy or rent from the local council.
Why can't tourists rent from the council? Also, if landlords genuinely produce value, you'd expect to see homeowners hiring landlords for access to their valuable services.
Tourists can't rent from the council because of the potato famine that was caused by red back insects that are depleting the nations waters which is leading to duvets not being washed in restaurants that have fewer than 1 stars allowing the great potato to finish.
You misunderstand finance, that’s the problem here so it’s not really worth explaining why this is wrong.
FFS could they come up with any more ideas to push rent up.
Just build lots of houses, millions.
Don't add more tax to rent, do not pay above rental prices to house migrants, do not mess up the economy and push up interest rates.
Or stop mass immigration.
Just apply for her job already, please.
That's fine, I'll just raise the rent on my tenant. I don't want to do that but I'm not going to lose money on my investment. I won't suffer, but those who rent will.
My rental income is already a very small margin Vs tax & mortgage. I'm not going to pay for someone else to live in my house. Worst case I'll sell up and then the tenant loses their home to a FTB or gets rinsed by some soulless agency.
How thin are your margins my guy? Where is all of your rental income going?
I think I last calculated it that after I paid tax, the mortgage, and agency fees I'm making about £30ish per month, however I'm also gaining capital in the mortgage which makes it worth it as a long term investment.
But there's also additional agency fees, random repairs etc that I've had to do.
I've not been a landlord for long and haven't done my first tax return yet so won't know exactly how much tax I'll be paying until that's done.
Said so casually for someone who ‘doesn’t want to do that’. Abhorrent ‘I’m alright Jack’ attitude
You’re the problem, you couldn’t actually afford the house. Now the government have upped interest rates and you have to pass on the loss to people that are already struggling. If you could actually afford the house and bought it outright you wouldn’t have to make people suffer.
I'm paying the same rate I locked in on when I purchased the property. I was living there at first then moved for work and decided to rent it.
Also the government doesn't control interest rates idk what you're talking about.
I have never increased the rent on my tenant, and I'll only do so if I begin to make a loss.
If I brought the house outright I'd still charge what the lettings agency recommend.
Just because you can't even afford a mortgage doesn't make it my problem, and if the government make me make a loss by increasing tax that's the government's fault not mine, I'm not going to lose money to fund your lifestyle.
My house is owned outright thank you very much. A second ago it was “I need to make money on my investment” and now you’re acting like you’re breaking even. Your username is most appropriate 😂😂
Yes I need to make some money, not lose money. I make a tiny margin each month, the investment is in the capital I gain by paying off the mortgage.
And nice, you're going to attack my neuro divergence? Real classy. Why do you hate people with autism?
We need to pair it so you can't rent for more than 90% of a mortgage cost.
You can't make money, awesome, go bankrupt.
I'd vote any party that promises to bankrupt landlords.
Why on Earth would I go bankrupt? I'd just sell the property if it wasn't financially viable lol. It's absolutely not my primary source of income.
Well that’s kind of great for renters, if landlords are having a massive sell off on properties then either house prices go down for first time buyers or a large corporation with better regulation and credit compared to a private individual landlord buys it up and continues to rent at a cheap price knowing that they have the business liquidity to do such a thing.
Potentially, but not necessarily. Many renters will not have the savings for a mortgage so they're simply not getting on the ladder even if prices go down, some people will have bad credit etc too or already be in debt, they're not going to benefit from their home being sold, and also imo you're more likely to get higher rents from a soulless corporation who have shareholders to answer to and regularly review market averages for rent than from a private landlord like me who won't bother putting rent up unless I absolutely have to.
Honestly the less large corporations owning houses the better, as they're very unlikely to ever sell and will have a much easier time buying houses en masse and then being able to artificially control the market while pricing out FTBs and lower income tenants alike.
The law is currently that rent has to be 125% of the mortgage at least, and I'm simplifying it. You should take this knowledge of a sign the mantra your repeating is stupid.
“I’m not going to lose money on my investment” is why you’re part of the problem, sometimes you should lose money on your investment, that’s how investments generally work, why are you entitled to a risk free investment
Lmao that's absurd. If I have a choice as to whether I lose money or not, of course I'm not going to choose to lose money.
Absolute clown level thinking there. I cannot comprehend your level of stupidity that you think given the choice people would just gleefully lose large amounts of money. Incredible, honestly made my day 😂😂😂🤡🤡🤡
Yeah, you shouldn’t have a choice, this is why rent caps should exist, obviously I’m not expecting individuals to put themselves out of pocket voluntarily
That's fine I'll just sell up and then there's no houses to rent because it's not worth it. The people who cannot afford to buy can simply live on the streets lol. 1IQ take thanks.
Speaking of living on the streets, do you let random homeless strangers live in your house for no profit incentive, or do you only expect this if other people?
While I agree largely with the sentiment of your statement, I just want to point out that your way of conveying it makes you sound like a spoiled 15 year old :)
I admit I got a little carried away with my phrasing.
If you only own 1 home you can make this argument, if not then it doesn’t work.
I do only own 1 home lol
Then your other comment where you complained about your rental income only being slightly more than your mortgage is crazy, you charge a lodger enough rent to cover your entire mortgage?
No, I rent out the property I own while living in accommodation provided by my work.
So it’s not an investment? You’re just an opportunist capitalising on people.
Gen Z?
When there is limited supply and high demand people are not going to lose money on their investments, why would they? Id demand drops off and prices fall then of course they could.
“Well other people aren’t lowering rates so why should I” is the same reason all fast food is now at least 7 pounds.
But they will tell themselves otherwise so they can section 28 a single mother late on her rent while they have a Beamer and a 5 bed house in Hertfordshire , own your true morality instead of pretending PLEASE😂
Hey renters, guess what this means for you?
That’s right, even higher rents!
Hey renters, tomorrow is Saturday, you know what that means?
That's right, even higher rents.
Because landlords are greedy af right? That’s the quiet part
Landlords are just supposed to smile and absorb the hit out of the goodness of their hearts?
It’s not about being “greedy” — it’s how every business works. Costs go up, prices go up. Rent is no different.
How is being a landlord a business?
Right, because providing a service, charging for it, covering expenses, and managing risk totally isn’t a business.
Tell that to HMRC and see how fast they laugh.
From wikipedia:
> Business is the practice of making one's living or making money by producing or buying and selling products (such as goods and services).
Since houses don't pop out of the ground or, unfortunately, maintain themselves, it requires labour to bring a property to a rentable, appealing condition that someone can move into tomorrow, and insure / maintain it whenever work needs doing.
Not to mention the capital you put up in order to do it for a living. Being a landlord is very asset-heavy with comparatively small profits, which means there is higher capital risk and excessive sensitivity to market and legislative conditions: AKA moronic politicians can shut you down with one bad move.
Why is property the one area where people often assume you should be doing all this out of the goodness of your heart?
Because it’s the inevitable result of such a policy.
Blaming private landlords for operating in a free market is just dumb.
Feel like they are taking all the exact opposite measures to actually helping tenants. 🤦♂️
Its not true - its a story made up by The Telegraph
There must be no Trans people they can bash today
The real solution is to just consolidate NI into income tax.
The UK would be far better off if we abolished ENIC, NI, and had a single rate of Income Tax.
You had me until single rate of income tax. That would be enormously regressive!
Why?
Higher earners pay more tax, in proportion, than lower earners. All over the world. Because we find it's good for society.
On a single rate of tax, higher earners would still pay more tax than someone on living wage.
On a flat rate of, say 20%, someone earning £100k would pay £20k in tax. Someone earning £10k would only pay £2k.
Everything gets passed on to tenants. Have they thought about Taxing tenants instead.
Surely this will only affect landlords that haven't put there companies in a LTD company?
yep the "little guys" who'll then have to sell up to Lloyds or blackrock
Shh.. don't give them ideas.
Yeah, and we'll all react by increasing rents.
They haven't thought about this have they?
So that will mean all rents will go up and the people that will pay this extra tax will be *checks notes* working people.
They must go up must they? There’s no other way? Like you could make just a smidge less money to the benefit of everyone else, but no screw them amiright
Just abolish NI and the Personal Allowance.
Make it 25% basic rate and a 45% higher rate after 60,000.
Problem solved.
Interesting strategy. The government obviously think rent is too low. Let's see how it plays out.
charge VAT on rental? so the landlord also charge the tenant? whats their logic?
It’s the Tory graph ffs .
Isn't national insurance capped at a moderate-high level?
This would just benefit corporate landlords and punish single rental landlords.
If they wanted to do anything serious they'd say that private corporations pay 30% tax on domestic rentals revenue, even playing field for private landlords, not some piss take posturing
Vat on residential property...
As someone who rents. I'm quite ok not seeing my costs go up thanks
As an ex-Landlord this is part of the reason I sold up….. this was always coming down the tracks and it’s not because of the people that own 2/3 rentals but the ‘big boys’.
It’s the same with the farmers they’re being screwed over because super rich tax dodgers saw a loophole and grabbed it.
Tax, tax and more tax. Then they take that money and give it to people who don't pay taxes. You voted for socialists and marxists so that it was you got
It’s the telegraph. Just ignore them and file this shut under rumours until RR gives a budget.
Boring
With the tax on farmers and these changes to housing it’s clear a massive land grab is about to happen..
Taxes on landlords are already very high. How does this one sector (plus oil and gas) get penalised more than any other and somehow it makes sense?
This will just drive up rents and increase scarcity. I’m not even a landlord and I think it’s bollocks.
Very high, but lower than working income which is subject to National Insurance...
So like other dividends from investment then. But lower returns.
You're right, we should tax dividends at the same rate as income too!
Excellent. Let’s just end investment and drive the few remaining positive contributors away.
When will the left learn? The recent capital gain tax rise hasn’t raised any money precisely because it’s a tax too far. Ideological purity over reality doesn’t pay for anything.
I think just rationalise the tax system for Landlords.
The comments on here; If you're living tenant rent cheque to tenant rent cheque, you maybe need to be in another game.
Obviously we can do without rental properties. There's no demand. Let's all demonise and jump on landlords. That seems like a good idea. Let's have a capitalist society that excludes landlords. They are just scum. After all, no one else makes any profit for providing a service? Do they?
You’re missing the bigger picture here - if you tax landlords they will just pass it onto the rental poors
Keeping this scum class down and dependant on renting assets from the wealthy instead of ever owning anything for themselves keeps them as quasi slaves to pick berries and do things with rudimentary tools such as mops
This article seems more like it’s trying to stir the pot than report actual news. It claims Reeves is being pushed to hit landlords with new taxes but doesn’t name a single MP who’s actually said that. Just vague references to “some MPs” and a few quotes from ex-advisers or people no longer in key roles. No clear proposals, no one going on record. It’s mostly speculation being passed off as something more serious.
This thread is one of the wildest things I’ve ever read on Reddit
99% of the population shrugs their shoulders.
I wouldn't worry about it. Most of them have rentals.
This pushes buy to let chancers out of the market but big corporations who have large property portfolios won’t really care. Their investment is a long term bet on housing in the uk constantly going up, as well as the short term returns on rent.
Where did the Labour Party manage to find MPs this fucking stupid ?
I don’t think that this goes far enough to keep all the poor people poor…
15% national insurance and 20% VAT is only about 35% more cost to renters.
These are rookie numbers. Trump can tariff China, why can’t we tariff the poor?
Just think how much we could raise for the NHS if we put a 100% tariff as well as NI and VAT on rent…
Discourage investment? From what? Foreign buyers or… you know… landlords who caused the mess? Cmon.
Tax increases, prices go up. Tax decreases, prices go down.
Anything to hurt landlords helps the housing crisis because no landlord provides or creates any homes, just charges people for the privilege of being outbid when trying to own it themselves. Nothing is lost but greed when a landlord is removed and an owner occupier (who would previously have been outbid) moves in, and suddenly has a future without the vagaries of renting.
For the tired old argument of, “well my tenants couldn’t afford to buy”, that doesn’t matter because the next wealthiest potential owner occupier moves in, their rented flat becomes available and, obviously, the supply of housing remains precisely and exactly the same, except for the landlords squeezing too many people into a property.
I know Reddit doesn't like Landlords, but forcing private landlords (real people) out of the market isn't a good thing. These rules will not apply to rental properties owned by companies.
You think it's bad now, can you imagine a world where the only rental options people have is to rent from dedicated rental companies owned by banks, pension funds or private equity...
Want to complain, speak to the bots or face a £25 admin fee
Late on Payments by a day, £25 late payment charge and a mark on your credit
Corporations are faceless they don't have feelings or compassion, they will charge accordingly and punish you if you don't comply.
thank god, then set rental limits and bar people from renting who don’t own the property outright to prevent the renter from inheriting the cost of the mortgage
I think that’s fair.
The better way to do this would be to remove the national insurance, which is just another income tax, and increase PAYE to compensate. That way, rental income would be taxed at the same rate as earned income.
What is undeniable is that an increase of the tax applied to rent would mean that rents would go up. Eventually pushing some people out of the bottom of the market and into sofa surfing or other undocumented homelessness.
I would like to know how much the telegraph who have made up this story think it would raise. My guess is, not much, which is why this won't happen.
It’s a good idea. Rents are based on what the market can bear. Rental income is income and should be taxed as such.
Only fair tbh
Great idea. Rightly so.
If you ask me, the £1000 allowance before paying income tax on rent received also needs abolishing too.
Do you just hate people who rent? Because they'll be the ones to suffer.
Oh look, a landlord trying to convince me that taxing landlords will actually hurt the tenants more than him.
So what you’re essentially saying is you’re willing to exploit your tenant as much as possible in order to maintain your lucrative cashcow?
Pay your share of taxes you dosser.